Tuesday, October 23, 2007

The Festival of Hate

Today (tomorrow?) is supposed to be the memorial day for Yitzhak Rabin. Instead, it's the culmination of a month-long festival of hatred towards Israel's political right-wing and religious camps.

If Israel was really interested in building bridges in Israel's society, Rabin's legacy of hate should be acknowledged, instead of sweeping it under the rug and going on an offensive attack on the right wing. The mantra, "words kill" has become synonymous with "protecting democracy" -- and the demonization of the right wing continues daily.

I believe that Rabin was a terrible, cold hearted person who had no problem ordering the killing of Jews for political gain (the sinking of the Altalena) and his arrogance towards the personal security of Jews in Israel as Palestinian terror rose to an all time high during his "Oslo Peace Accords" -- was despicable.

What Israel fails to understand is that there's a huge gap between writing the above and supporting the killing of Jews by Jews (which I do not support.)

47 comments:

Foolishly (will I never learn?), the minute Alon returns from the special ceremony, I try to grill him on what went on. Inevitably, he just shrugs and says, "Nothing." Pressed, he elaborates a little: "There were speeches and stuff." But in spite of all my pleading, he keeps refusing to give me even a single example of something one of his classmates said: "I can't remember." I nag on, and finally, in a last-ditch stab at being left alone, he glances at me with a look that combines disgust and disdain in equal measure and says, "It was all just a lot of lefty bulls-."

Hey good job! ive been having this fight with ynet talkbackers.. I dont suppert amir.. but you see rabin's grandson ben artzi raving to shut up anyone supporting amir's release.. all in the name of democracy..

I am disgusted by the left's BS double standard hypocricy...

Funny how fast they rush to crush ariel zilber once one of israel's most prominent musicians..

The twelfth anniversary of the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin is approaching, and some Israeli legislators are using the anniversary as an opportunity to pander and stand on their soapboxes while a nation mourns. Consider Knesset Member Eitan Cabel (Labor), who submitted a bill today that would prevent Israel’s president from granting clemency to someone who murdered a prime minister for political or ideological purposes.

The law contains within it a provision that would require 80 Knesset members (two-thirds) to repeal it.

In other words, convicted terrorists like Samir Kuntar (Hezbollah) and Marwan Barghouti (Fatah) would have a better chance of getting out of prison than Yigal Amir (Rabin's assassin) Amir killed only one person, unlike Kuntar and Barghouti.

Not only that, but Cabel's bill would intrude on the power of the president to grant pardons. Unlike the US, Israel does not have a strict separation of powers, and the Knesset can decide how much power the President may have.

You can rest in peace, Rabin, as legislators continue to undermine democracy in your name.

Your post indicates that you are nothing more than an extremist who would stop at nothing to prevent us from achieving a peaceful and just resolution with our neighbors while hiding behind the canard that you "don't support" the very actions you hope someone else will take on your behalf.

If you feel "hate" is being addressed to you, then it is probably because you feel your part of the collective guilt you extremist right-wingers all have for your current and former words and actions.

Words and actions that slowed down, but will never stop the process that Yitzchak Rabin began.

I see that Y. Rabin is regarded as some sort of evil figure by you and your readers. I see a few commenters advocating for his killer's release. Is that how you feel? You may have disagreed with his policies, but is the present state of affairs in Israel such that one Jew can hate another Jew that much?

I may not have agreed with Rabin completely, but I do believe that Yigal Amir felt encouraged to do what he did by people who vilified Rabin as much as you all seem to do. Do you feel his murder was justified? Was it a good thing? To many mainstream Jews, both in Israel and out, Rabin's murder was an all time lowpoint in Israeli history. I mean, an Israeli citizen killed the Prime Minister. How do you all feel? I'm really interested. I'm not left wing. But your vilification of a murdered Israeli leader sounds pretty scary to someone not politically affiliated.

I looked at the Rabin Church site one of your readers quoted. It refers to a web site that praises and lauds Baruch Goldstein. Is that how you feel, Jameel? Is that how your readers feel? Because in the real world, if a media outlet sited a website that supported a multiple murderer, the publisher would disavow affiliation with that remark, or at least distance themselves. Are you a supporter of Baruch Goldstein? It is not a facetious question. I'm new to all this, and I really want to know.

So let me sum up my questions for you, Jameel, from a main stream Jew in the diaspora who is trying to understand the point of view of a popular blogger who seems to have Likud affiliations and is originally from a modern orthodox community in the U.S, and is probably representative of his peers:

Do you hate Y. Rabin?

In a representative democracy, do you feel he was wrong to pursue peace if that is the platform he ran on?

Do you support the release of Y. Amir?

Do you feel Y. Amir was wrong to kill him?

Was his murder a good or bad event?

Was Baruch Goldstein a murderer or a hero?

Do you support the killing of Israelis who oppose your point of view or who want to give back the West Bank? What if that killing (like Rabin's) guarantees that Israel keeps this territory. Is it then O.K.?

Please answer these questions yourself and don't leave them to your commentors. I already see what they have to say.

Just let me know. It would be much appreciated. If you have any questions for me, I would be more than happy to answer them. Maybe your readers who don't live where you do or share all your views need to better understand what this blog stands for.

With much appreciation, Jonathan

P.S. If you don't agree with your commentors views as they creep further and further to the right, maybe you need to tell them. Or maybe you agree. Still, where I come from a blogger's community is reflective of their own views. maybe that's just me.

Oh, and can you explain how the Altalena was Rabin killing Jewish innocents? From my understanding, it was a ship full of arms that parties involved refused to relinquish to the then nascent Israeli Defense forces. Rabin was ordered by military superiors to fire on the ship, which was refusing to reliquish its cargo, in opposition to the then legitimate Israeli army.One more question, and I mean this seriously. If the Altalena event was a massacre, how do you, Jameel, regard Deir Yaseen. Is that also a tragedy. I'm just trying to understand who you are. Again, thank you for your attention. JonathanI'm not being sarcastic. I'm very interested in your answers, just to understand who you are.

you sound like you already made up your mind for someone "new to all this", and "really wants to know"

i'll leave it for other people to answer, but perhaps you can explain how shooting unarmed people in the water trying to swim to safety at shore is not murder or a war crime?

or perhaps you can explain to me how openly buying votes after completely lacking simple majority support for the "oslo platform" in the knesset by bribing opposition members alex goldfarb and gonen segev to quit their party and vote against the explicit party positions they were voted in for, in exchange for cabinet positions and a volvo is a legitimate act within the representational democratic process?

gonen segev was eventually arrested for drug smuggling and other illegal activities, and alex goldfarb has returned to obscurity

without having bought those votes, there would have been no majority in the knesset for rabin and peres's wild adventures with our lives

the suicide bombings began after rabin and peres brought arafat the terrorist to israel. they are responsible for giving him his base of operations. they provided him with weapons that were turned on us. they continued to negotiate with him after each worse and worse terrorist attack calling the victims of their sick adventurism "sacrifices for peace"

and it was rabin who had his security forces run the now exposed avishai raviv, their agent provacateur and his fake right wing group "eyal", whose mission it was to place onus on and discredit the right-wing for actions and activites they had no part in

ANON, what was legit about the then Israeli government? There had been no elections. There was more than one army fighting against the arabs. When Rabin fired on the ship, Begin would not let his soldiers fight back because he would not allow Jew killing Jew. Even if the story is what you pretend it be, what justification was there for Rabin to murder the survivors that swam to shore? As to Deir yassin, even if the story were true I'll take Jews over Arabs any day. If I could go back in time and trade 6 million Arabs for the Jews in shoah, I would without guilt. Even 12 million Germans.

ANON, what was legit about the then Israeli government? There had been no elections. There was more than one army fighting against the arabs. When Rabin fired on the ship, Begin would not let his soldiers fight back because he would not allow Jew killing Jew. Even if the story is what you pretend it be, what justification was there for Rabin to murder the survivors that swam to shore? As to Deir yassin, even if the story were true I'll take Jews over Arabs any day. If I could go back in time and trade 6 million Arabs for the Jews in shoah, I would without guilt. Even 12 million Germans.

The Brooklyn District Attorney's office has requested the extradition of Avrohom Mondrowitz, a resident of Jerusalem and a prominent member of the Ger Hassidic sect, on child molestation charges dating back over two decades involving four boys aged 11 to 16.

The extradition request was made in January, according to Brooklyn District Attorney's Office spokesman Jerry Schmetterer. "We know that the US Department of Justice and the State Department have begun the extradition process," said Schmetterer. "It is also our understanding that the Israeli Justice Ministry has been contacted as well."

The Justice Ministry declined to comment.

Mondrowitz, who was contacted by telephone by The Jerusalem Post, hung up as soon as the reporter identified himself.

However, a prominent member of the Ger community in Jerusalem defended Mondrowitz.

"There are people who are trying to disparage Mondrowitz's name," said the source.

"Mondrowitz is a very intelligent, talented man and so are all of his children. His father is highly respected in the community. I can't believe these stories are true.

The source said Mondrowitz was in the computer business.

Mondrowitz worked for a short period at the Jerusalem College of Technology as a fund-raiser and at the Jerusalem College of Engineering as a lecturer.

The Post has also learned that Dep.-Cmdr. Avi Aviv of the National Fraud Squad's Cyber Crimes Division is conducting an investigation against Mondrowitz.

Mondrowitz, who was born in Tel Aviv in 1947 and later moved with his family to Chicago, arrived in Brooklyn in the late 1970s and presented himself to Orthodox educational institutions as a rabbi and clinical psychologist.

He provided psychological treatment to children from the mixed Jewish-Italian Borough Park neighborhood where he lived. He also opened a yeshiva for children with behavioral problems.

Four children, all from Italian families and all neighbors of Mondrowitz, complained of sexual abuse perpetrated by Mondrowitz. Jewish victims also eventually testified against him, but only after the statute of limitations had expired.

In 1985, a New York State court charged Mondrowitz with eight counts of child abuse in the first degree, endangering the welfare of a child and five counts of sodomy in the first degree.

Mondrowitz and his family fled to Jerusalem after a warrant was issued for his arrest.

At the time of the indictment, sodomy of boys was not an extraditable crime, since it was not defined as rape under Israeli law. In 1988, the Knesset changed that law, apparently opening the way for Mondrowitz's extradition.

The Brooklyn DA's office said Mondrowitz could not be extradited until this year, when the Knesset approved a law removing the impediments to retroactively applying the 1988 law.

But Michael Lesher, an attorney representing six men who say they were molested by Mondrowitz in the early 1980s but who were not included in the original indictment, said the extradition was delayed due to officials, especially Brooklyn District Attorney Charles J. Hynes, dragging their feet.

Lesher claims that Hynes balked due to heavy pressure to drop the case from the Orthodox community in Brooklyn, which supported Mondrowitz despite the fact that Israel's Edah Haredit Rabbinic Court issued a ruling in 1988 in which unnamed "insidious acts" committed by Mondrowitz were mentioned, and warning him to stay away from children.

"Hynes was elected in 1989 with strong Orthodox support," Lesher said in an e-mailed message. "He appointed a virtually all-Orthodox Jewish Advisory Council after being elected, and he reversed the policy of his predecessor, Elizabeth Holtzman, and did not press for Mondrowitz's return to face trial.

In September 1993, Hynes instructed the federal government to close its file on Mondrowitz and said he would not pursue the case while Mondrowitz remained in Israel.

Lesher said he was "elated" to see the district attorney finally moving to extradite Mondrowitz. "All my clients hope that Mondrowitz will at last be brought to justice."

In response to Lesher's claims, Schmetterer said extradition was impossible until the Knesset acted this year.

But in past news reports on delays, Hynes's office was quoted as providing a different explanation. Sources were cited saying that despite the changes in Israeli law, the extradition request could not be made retroactively.

Anoyn,You logic is flawd and your debating on the wrong site, you wont find many amir supporters here.

Each person makes his or her choices in life, its called "bechira chofshit" to say that our protests / anger / opposition to rabin fueled amir is purely ludacris... do you suggest stiffling all oppostion speech on such grounds ?

In the US its termed "clear and present danger" and this is termed " democratic opposition"

Care to hear what the left spews hourly against us reliugious / settlers ? that in itself is definatly incitment to violence.. like yaron london suggesting people beat settlers that were blocking roads, with chains.

And we wont even go near the arab sector...

Every year at this time we hear the chest thumping of the leftist totalitarian dictators "rightist extremists! 5th column! lock them up! this should be outlawd!"

The only hate I see spews from the mouth of the leftist politicians...

Daniel is correct in the fact that no one elected ben gurion.. there was no popular vote as in the US indapendince.

Take of your tin foil hat and read Efraim karsh "the new historians" and ezra yakhin's eye whitness acount "yehoyakam"

Dir yassin was a massacre like jenin was a massacre...

As for baruch goldstein.. you brought that up on the wrong blog.. ask jameel how he felt being shot at on sukot.. I live here and we get attacked almost daily.. if goldstein prevented a massacre than he perpetrated no massacre did he ?

Jonathan: Oh, and can you explain how the Altalena was Rabin killing Jewish innocents? From my understanding, it was a ship full of arms that parties involved refused to relinquish to the then nascent Israeli Defense forces.

You should be aware, then, that your "understanding" is based on lies and gross distortions. The Irgun had already agreed to turn over the weapons to forces under Ben-Gurion's command, and they also agreed to integrate their own forces into the joint command structure that B-G had called for. They were in the middle of negotiations over the details when B-G ordered the sinking of the ship and the liquidation of all those on board. According to memoirs written by B-G's own aides who were present in his office, B-G had held off on giving this order for at least two days -- he first wanted to know whether Menahem Begin was personally on board the ship. When the message finally came that Begin was indeed aboard, B-G immediately picked up the phone and gave the order the sink the ship without delay.

Also, can you explain how Rabin was not guilty of murdering Jewish innocents, seeing as he continued firing on the ship even after those on board raised a white flag of surrender? And if you are prepared to justify even that, can you explain how Rabin was not guilty of murder even after he fired upon the unarmed survivors in the water, who were desperately trying to swim to shore?!

For all those who feel that the Altalena massacre should be ignored when discussing Yitzhak Rabin's legacy, it should be borne in mind that Rabin himself saw his role in the execution of this atrocity as the crowning achievement of his career, and he used to brag about it:

When Rabin was Israel's ambassador in Washington, the embassy held an Israel Independence Day celebration. Each of the guests was asked to recall a memorable event that he had experienced. Of all his experiences, Yitzchak Rabin chose the story of how he had personally shot the Jews -- some of them Holocaust refugees -- who had jumped overboard the burning Altalena. "We shot them on the ship and we shot them while they swam in the water," Rabin bragged to the embarrassed guests.[From a 2001 essay by Moshe Feiglin]

Wow.I specifically requested that Jameel answer. I really had no interest in hearing from the rest of you. Your answers are predictable.Orange and Black. you give me too much credit. I honestly don't know the details of these things. I really am new to all this. In the typical history of Israel (I read Paul Johnson's History of the Jews and another history of Zionism whose author I can't recall) there is no mention of shooting people in the water. Just that the Irgun would not surrender the arms. I never heard that before. Still, why is it justified that they wanted their own armaments at all?Orange and Black, your accusation that I'm a phony is kind of sad. My questions are legit, and I'm really not particularly left or right. I guess in the Hillel and Shamai debate about teach me the Torah on one foot, you would have been the Shamai character who throws the man out of the room.Daniel, your statements on Deir Yassin and that killing Arabs over Jews is somehow better is quite frankly just scary. Were you always this radical? It's remarks like that which alienate people like me and make you suspect. I think it's kind of funny in the same stream as people claiming the Right had nothing to do with baruch Goldstein.Daniel, Ben Gurion wasn't elected. That's funny. In 1948, was there time for a legitimate election? Clearly,Begin and his supporters were the minority, as was evidenced by the electios which were held thereafter. That's very amusing.Lurker, thank you for trying to give me the facts. I'll sit down tonight and read them when I have a little bit more time. As for your claim that rabin bragged about shooting them in the water, I'll have to read that myself.Elchonon, this is a real question. No sarcasm. I just want to understand. How did Baruch Goldstein prevent a massacre? Were the people he specifically shot terrorists? How does his specific act of killing people relate to Jameel being shot at in 2007?Jameel, I really wanted to hear from you and not your readers. They kind of scare me. I'd like to think you could give me more thoughtful answer to my questions.Free advice: If you write about killing Arabs or how Jewish lives are worth more than others, you just come out sounding crazy and radical. The world values Jewish values. Maybe you should exhibit some.I'm sorry that mainstream questions and statements seem so radical to this audience. Most people in the Jewish community might asked them if allowed. All the best, Jonathan

Jonathan: I specifically requested that Jameel answer. I really had no interest in hearing from the rest of you. Your answers are predictable...Jameel, I really wanted to hear from you and not your readers. They kind of scare me.

I hope that you will forgive me for responding to your comments once again. You made numerous statements that are based upon erroneous assumptions, and I feel that it is appropriate to respond to them. This is an open forum, after all. I will try not to scare you too much...

Jonathan: In the typical history of Israel (I read Paul Johnson's History of the Jews and another history of Zionism whose author I can't recall) there is no mention of shooting people in the water. Just that the Irgun would not surrender the arms. I never heard that before.

The shooting of unarmed people in the water is mentioned in countless primary and secondary accounts of the Altalena massacre. For a typical example, see the Wikipedia entry:

There was danger that the fire would spread to the holds which contained explosives, and Captain Monroe Fein ordered all aboard to abandon ship. People jumped into the water, whilst their comrades on shore set out to meet them on rafts. Although Captain Fein flew the white flag of surrender, automatic fire continued to be directed at the unarmed survivors swimming in the water.

The following is the written testimony of Captain Monroe Fein:

"The first thought all of us had was to remove the wounded men. There was no panic. Everyone behaved in an extremely calm and heroic manner. As the men began jumping off the ship and swimming towards the shore, those of us still on board saw that they were being shot at continuously from rifles and machine-guns on the beach. I rushed to the bridge and began waving a white flag and shouting to stop the fire on the men who were swimming for their lives. At the same time another man hoisted a large piece of white canvas on the halyard, but these efforts were of little avail, as the firing continued."[Days of Fire by Shmuel Katz, W.H. Allen, London, 1968]

Feel free to consult with just about any other serious detailed account of the Altalena massacre, and you will find the same thing. The shooting of the men swimming in the water is a very well-established fact. Btw, I once met the daughter of one of the men who was murdered by Rabin while trying to swim to shore.

So, perhaps you can answer my earlier question: Knowing this, do you maintain that Rabin was not a murderer?

Once again, thank you for your response, though not solicited. During my lunch hour I coincidentally looked up the Wikipedia entry for Deir yassin. Does your quoting Wiki for the Altalena mean you would also quote it for D.Y.? Again, although you seem suspicious of my motives, this is not meant to be antagonostic.Jonathan

Simplistic debates fill the papers and the screens, with polemicists on the left claiming immunity (for one night only!) and taking the opportunity to bash the religious/right and appear holier than thou, (all the while simultaneously opportunistically plugging their latest political/peace/whatever proposals by cynically sticking Rabin's name on it and defining it as a central pillar of his 'legacy'). Which is then typically followed, or pre-empted, by defensive polemicists from the right banging on about the Altelena and leftist hypocrisy.

Indeed. What a shame that the blogosphere- this blog in particular- has to get stuck in this rut too...

Finally, some free (and friendly) Advice to Jonathan:

1. Take no notice of Orange&Black: He's about as genuine as he's accusing you of not being. 2. If you honestly want to hear from Jameel, you should probably email him instead of throwing more meat on the BBQ of the hungry phantom sharks.

I'm sorry. I missed something. Who were the people B Goldstein killed? I'm sorry to sound ignorant, but weren't they just people at a mosque? I never heard anyone claim they were conspiring or an imminent threat. Weren't they just Arabs at the wrong place at the wrong time? Were they armed?I don't mean to sound antagonistic, I'm just trying to ascertain the facts.Thanks, Jonathan

The Chevron massacre was terrible. No debate. What does it have to do with what we're talking about? They're not even in the same time frame. And I know someone who observes Jewish law would never suggest an eye for an eye applies under these circumstances.I like the idea that Deir Yassin was harboring terrorists. It's using a George W Bush term for an era where I'm not even sure the term terrorist had been created yet.Killing innocents is abhorrent. Period. If y. rabin did it, he is culpable as well. But let's call a spade a spade.Jonathan

Jonathan: During my lunch hour I coincidentally looked up the Wikipedia entry for Deir yassin. Does your quoting Wiki for the Altalena mean you would also quote it for D.Y.?

Yes, certainly I would (and have). The Wikipedia article quotes sources on both sides of the issue. Some of the quotes in the article are quite edifying, such as the following:

Meir Pa'il's eyewitness account is one of the most detailed single eye witness accounts of the massacre, as he claims to have been at the scene while it happened...Historian Uri Milstein says: "On a massacre following the battle there is only the account of Me’ir Pa’il, who claims that he was in the village during and after the battle," and subsequently brings evidence that Pa’il was not at Deir-Yassin at all. All other members of the Irgun denied seeing Pa'il there.

Yunes Ahmed Assad testified in Al Urdun, a daily Jordanian newspaper:

"The Jews never intended to hurt the population of the village, but were forced to do so after they met enemy fire from the population, which killed the Irgun commander."

In an article dated April 2, 1998, The Jerusalem Post describes a BBC program in which Abu Mahmud resident of Dir Yassin in 1948 stated: "... the villagers protested against the atrocity claims: We said, "There was no rape." [Khalidi] said, "We have to say this, so the Arab armies will come to liberate Palestine from the Jews..."

Khalidi was a prominent Palestinian Arab leader who pushed the editor of the Palestine Broadcasting Service's Arabic news in 1948, Hazem Nusseibeh, to make the most use of alleged atrocities in Dir Yassin.

Mohammed Radwan who fought in the battle:-

"I know when I speak that God is up there and God knows the truth and God will not forgive the liars," said Radwan, who puts the number of villagers killed at 93, listed in his own handwriting. "There were no rapes. It's all lies. There were no pregnant women who were slit open. It was propaganda that... Arabs put out so Arab armies would invade," he said. "They ended up expelling people from all of Palestine on the rumor of Deir Yassin." This was reported by Paul Holmes, Middle East Times, 20-April-1998

Ayish Zeidan, a teenager, known as Haj Ayish:-

"We heard shooting. My mother did not want us to look out of the window. I fled with my sister, but my mother and my other sisters could not make it. They hid in the cellar for four days and then ran away". He said he never believed that more than 110 people had died at Deir Yassin and that Arab leaders exaggerated the atrocities. "There had been no rape. The Arab radio at the time talked of women being killed and raped, but this is not true. I believe that most of those who were killed were among the fighters and the women and children who helped the fighters."

Menachem Begin, who did not partecipate in the battle, wrote that:-

'Apart from the military aspect, there is a moral aspect to the story of Dir Yassin. At that village, whose name was publicized throughout the world, both sides suffered heavy casualties. We had four killed and nearly forty wounded. The number of casualties was nearly forty percent of the total number of the attackers. The Arab troops suffered casualties nearly three times as heavy. The fighting was thus very severe. Yet the hostile propaganda, disseminated throughout the world, deliberately ignored the fact that the civilian population of Dir Yassin was actually given a warning by us before the battle began. One of our tenders carrying a loud speaker was stationed at the entrance to the village and it exhorted in Arabic all women, children and aged to leave their houses and to take shelter on the slopes of the hill. By giving this humane warning our fighters threw away the element of complete surprise, and thus increased their own risk in the ensuing battle. A substantial number of the inhabitants obeyed the warning and they were unhurt. A few did not leave their stone houses — perhaps because of the confusion. The fire of the enemy was murderous - to which the number of our casualties bears eloquent testimony. Our men were compelled to fight for every house; to overcome the enemy they used large numbers of hand grenades. And the civilians who had disregarded our warnings suffered inevitable casualties.

The education which we gave our soldiers throughout the years of revolt was based on the observance of the traditional laws of war. We never broke them unless the enemy first did so and thus forced us, in accordance with the accepted custom of war, to apply reprisals. I am convinced, too, that our officers and men wished to avoid a single unnecessary casualty in the Dir Yassin battle. But those who throw stones of denunciation at the conquerors of Dir Yassin would do well not to don the cloak of hypocrisy.

In connection with the capture of Dir Yassin the Jewish Agency found it necessary to send a letter of apology to Abdullah, whom Mr. Ben Gurion, at a moment of great political emotion, called 'the wise ruler who seeks the good of his people and this country.' The 'wise ruler,' whose mercenary forces demolished Gush Etzion and flung the bodies of its heroic defenders to birds of prey, replied with feudal superciliousness. He rejected the apology and replied that the Jews were all to blame and that he did not believe in the existence of 'dissidents.' Throughout the Arab world and the world at large a wave of lying propaganda was let loose about 'Jewish atrocities.'

Jonathan: Again, although you seem suspicious of my motives, this is not meant to be antagonostic.

I am not suspicious of your motives. You just don't seem to know very much (as you yourself have indicated), and you make all sorts of assumptions that are based upon propaganda rather than facts. I don't intend to be antagonostic either.

Jameel is currently under the weather, and will be back to blogging next week. He has been made aware that you have asked him questions. He hasn’t gone online to actually read them yet. I believe he will answer your questions next week. (Let’s all wish him a refuah shleimah).

In the meantime, I think the vehemence you feel towards you and the questions you’ve asked is from the unfortunate manner in which your questions have been phrased.

It is not that you simply come across as ignorant of very basic facts and history.

But rather, that you asked your questions in a way that shows that you've been presented and have accepted a rather one-sided, propagandized version of events.

Versions that come from (a) Arab propaganda (the completely discredited Deir Yassin pseudo-history), (b) standard left-wing nonsense (that the democratic process was respected and not completely trampled on to advance the Oslo agenda), (c) left-wing incitement (those who protested against the Oslo agenda are collectively guilty of killing Rabin) and (d) attempts to silence, disparage and discredit any verbal opposition (any response by the Right is defensive polemics, and you must first publicly state your regret for Rabin's murder if you wish to express any opinion on the matter, which also goes back to (c)).

Still, if you look underneath the strong responses you received from (most of) the commenters you will learn of a more complete version of the actual facts of what happened, and perhaps understand why your questions come across as so incredibly offensive.

You are also asking the questions during the month long period in which the Left in Israel use to collectively (and continuously) bash the Right on all media and political fronts while ignoring the results of their own actions. It is a time that will generally draw a stronger response to questions phrased by someone using left-wing propaganda as a baseline for their questions.

I wonder if Lurker can provide a reliable link to information supposedly part of the Shamgar Commission report about the alleged weapons cache found in the Ma'arat Hamachpela, as well as to the alleged army reports that they were expecting an imminent massace by the Arabs that Purim?

Joe,Ive never read the shmagar report in its original, and I will not use wiki for facts..

http://www.geocities.com/chaimsimons/baruchgoldstein

"A study of the Minutes of the proceedings of the Shamgar Commission (over 2,200 pages in open sessions alone) reveals that intelligence sources had reported on an impending attack by Arabs against Jews in Hebron in the period around Purim. This was not just a stray statement given by one witness, but the clear and unambiguous testimony of no fewer than nine officers in the defense establishment! "

He does not however directly quote the shamgar commision regarding weapons inside, instead he quotes various people..

Jameel here. Sorry I wasn't around to answer your questions directly last week, but I was a bit under the weather. (And I didn't even read my blog, which is very rare)

First of all, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to comment here. Also, please be advised that while there are all sorts of people that comment here -- and there representation of the "right wing" is not always the same as mine.

I will get back to this comment thread a bit later today with more of my own insights, and hope to satisfactorily answer your questions.

I am convinced that "The Festival of Hate" is indeed the correct term for the media circus surrounding this memorial day, and that a very large part of the population realizes it, a percentage which is growing. I don't think that we have to apologize for pointing this out as much as possible.